Abstract
Medical information is presented to clinicians in many forms such as charts, graphs, and text messages. When analyzing symptoms, making diagnoses, or determining courses of action, there are many junctures in the process that are error prone or time consuming, which begs for improved user interfaces. We were interested in comparing a “widely used” medical display with an equivalent symbolic display based on cognitive and visual physiology to explore whether a set of principles could be applied to the symbolic system and render the clinical information effectively. We found evidence to support the notion that condensing contextualized information into symbols can convey objective semantics, improving display effectiveness, and facilitating clinical decision-making in terms of accuracy and time. The application was developed using key components from the Web 3.0 specifications, such as HTML5, social media interfaces, AJAX (asynchronous JavaScript and XML)/JavaScript Object Notation (JSON), and Web Services.
I would like to thank Dr. Michael F. Lesser, MD, for his assistance in the development of the semantic medical displays.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Averbach, E., & Sperling, G. (1961). Short-term storage of information in vision. In C. Cherry (Ed.), Information theory (pp. 196–211). London: Butterworth.
Barnhardt, T. M. (2005). Number of solutions effects in stem decision: Support for the distinction between identification and production processes in priming. Memory, 13, 725–748.
Bederson, B. B., Shneiderman, B., & Wattenberg, M. (2002). Ordered and quantum treemaps: Making effective use of 2D space to display hierarchies. In B. B. Bedderson & B. Shneiderman (Eds.), The craft of information visualization (pp. 257–278). San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann.
Bradshaw, L. (2006). Information overload and the Hurricane Katrina post-disaster disaster. Fremantle: Information Enterprises.
Cowan, N. (2000). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 87–185.
Doneva, S. P., & De Fockert, J. W. (2014). More conservative go/no-go response criterion under high working memory load. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 26(1), 110–117.
Dyer, C. (2002). Doctors go on trial for manslaughter after removing wrong kidney. British Medical Journal, 324, 10–11.
Elliott, E. M., Morey, C. C., Morey, R. D., Eaves, S. D., Shelton, J. T., & Lutfi-Proctor, D. A. (2014). The role of modality: Auditory and visual distractors in Stroop interference. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 26(1), 15–26.
Endsley, M. R., Bolte, B., & Jones, D. G. (2003). Designing for situation awareness: An approach to user-centered design. New York: Taylor & Francis.
Halford, G. S., Baker, R., McCredden, J. E., & Bain, J. D. (2005). How many variables can humans process? Psychological Science, 16, 70–76.
Khemlania, S., & Johnson-Laird, P. N. (2013). Cognitive changes from explanations. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 25(2), 139–146.
Loft, S., Sanderson, P., Neal, A., & Mooij, M. (2007). Modeling and predicting mental workload in en route air traffic control: Critical review and broader implications. The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 49, 376–399.
Lohr, L. (2003). Creating visuals for learning and performance: Lessons in visual literacy. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
Shneiderman, B. (1992). Designing the user interface: Strategies for effective human-computer interaction. Boston: Addison-Wesley Longman.
Tulving, E., & Thomson, D. (1973). Encoding specificity and retrieval processes in episodic memory. Psychological Review, 80(5), 352–373.
Workman, M. (2008). An experimental assessment of semantic apprehension of graphical linguistics. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 2578–2596.
Yost, B., & North, C. (2005). Single complex glyphs versus multiple simple glyphs. Proceedings from the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Portland, OR, USA. April 2–7, pp. 1889–1892.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Workman, M. (2016). Using Symbols for Semantic Representations: A Pilot Study of Clinician Opinions of a Web 3.0 Medical Application. In: Workman, M. (eds) Semantic Web. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16658-2_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16658-2_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-16657-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-16658-2
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)